I don?t like these non-U3 numbers, and here?s why: first, if someone isn?t actively looking for work, then they aren?t unemployed ? they just simply don?t exist in the labor pool (like someone who is retired). If they want a job, then their full-time job is to FIND A JOB, so should be out actively interviewing, pushing resumes, etc. If they were ?active?, then they would already be included in U3 figure.
Now, people who are ?only? working part-time, but want a full-time job, should just go get a second part-time job ? otherwise they don?t really want to work full-time (they are content, like my wife, with their part-time employment). However, if they are actively spending their spare time trying to secure that better paying full-time job (or second part-time job) then should be counted as ?underemployed? ? I guess that is U6, but U6 includes a bunch of trash as well.
Now my rant about the malarkey (newly learned Biden term) that is ShadowStats, the basis for the blue graph. He is counting people who (honestly, not under duress) answered NO to the question: ?Have you tried to find work in the past 4 weeks??, and then he adds people who haven?t had ANY employment (of any kind) in the past 52-weeks.
That blue graph is counting people who haven?t worked a DAY in the past year, and haven?t made any effort what-so-ever to find a job in the past month! Hell, how long does someone need to not work until you consider them not in the labor force (NILF)?
Claiming that it is the ?REAL Unemployed Rate? is outlandish, and reeks of right wing-nut conspiracy theories.
Source: http://allfinancialmatters.com/2012/10/11/chart-of-the-day-the-real-unemployement-rate/
new apple tv sun flare love hewitt new ipad solar flare joseph kony 2012 arian foster
কোন মন্তব্য নেই:
একটি মন্তব্য পোস্ট করুন